Citation Nr: 0307886
Decision Date: 04/24/03 Archive Date: 04/30/03
DOCKET NO. 99-01 819 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Louisville,
Kentucky
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disorder,
to include post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL
Appellant
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Hallie E. Brokowsky, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran had active service from September 1973 to August
1975.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA
or Board) on appeal from a November 1998 rating decision of
the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in
Louisville, Kentucky (RO) which denied the benefit sought on
appeal.
REMAND
The veteran claims entitlement to service connection for a
psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD. A review of the
record leads the Board to conclude that additional
development is necessary in this case before proceeding with
appellate disposition, as the record does not contain
sufficient development to render a decision as to the
veteran's claim at this time.
A preliminary review of the record reveals that the veteran's
claim was previously before the Board. In June 2000, the
Board reopened the veteran's claim for service connection and
remanded the case to the RO for additional development of
evidence. The requested development was completed by the RO,
and the RO issued a supplemental statement of the case in
June 2002, which continued to deny the veteran's claim for
service connection. In response, the veteran submitted a VA
Form 9 (Appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals), on which
he indicated that he wanted a hearing before a Member of the
Board at a local VA office. The veteran's request for a
hearing was acknowledged by the RO in August 2002, and
requested that the veteran consider a videoconference hearing
in lieu of a VA Travel Board hearing. The veteran responded
that he would accept a videoconference hearing before the
Board of Veterans' Appeals. Following the issuance of
another supplemental statement of the case in September 2002,
the veteran, in an October 2002 statement, again requested a
hearing before the Board of Veterans' Appeals. Nonetheless,
the veteran has not been afforded an opportunity for such a
hearing.
Therefore, it is the Board's opinion that in order to give
the veteran every consideration with respect to the current
appeal, further development of the case is necessary.
Accordingly, this case is REMANDED for the following action:
The veteran should be scheduled for a
videoconference hearing before a Veterans
Law Judge of the Board of Veterans'
Appeals at the RO at the next available
opportunity. Thereafter, the case should
be returned to the Board for appellate
review.
The purpose of this remand is to obtain additional
development, and the Board does not intimate any opinion as
to the merits of the case, either favorable or unfavorable at
this time. The veteran is free to submit any additional
evidence and/or argument he desires to have considered in
connection with his current appeal. No action is required of
the veteran until he is notified.
_________________________________________________
WARREN W. RICE, JR.
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the
nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a
decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.
38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2002).